"you just don't understand"

[~Neurotica]

I fully endorse all of Grimace's posts here. He is 100% right. If you completely reject an entire genre than you are guilty. Like he said, there is good rap, there is good country, there is good pop, there is good emo, and there is good metalcore. Entire genres cannot ever be good or bad. Nu metal is an excellent example of this -- it has it's shit and it's gold, like every genre

true...true...

 

[Scapegoat]

What the hell is going on here? I'm not even allowed to decide what music I like now, I might get labelled as close-minded . Stop polluting this thread with your whiny bullshit.

I love how you just label anyone who disagree's with you as close-minded. By your reasoning, someone would not be able to say they dislike pizza until they have tried every pizzeria's version with every topping in every combination. Obviously, someone doesn't have try every conceivable pizza to determine that they don't like pizza.

Stop trying to tell people what kind of music to enjoy. If you like metalcore fine, but for Satan's sake, climb down off of the high horse.

 

[~Neurotica]

What the hell is going on here? I'm not even allowed to decide what music I like now, I might get labelled as close-minded . Stop polluting this thread with your whiny bullshit.

I love how you just label anyone who disagree's with you as close-minded. By your reasoning, someone would not be able to say they dislike pizza until they have tried every pizzeria's version with every topping in every combination. Obviously, someone doesn't have try every conceivable pizza to determine that they don't like pizza.

Stop trying to tell people what kind of music to enjoy. If you like metalcore fine, but for Satan's sake, climb down off of the high horse.

Calm down listen to what you like... its just discussion...

 

[Necro Joe]

Yes. There is.

You might be more convincing if you made some reference to the questions I asked.

 

[skeptik]

I already berated her to the point of her accepting that she's wrong.

 

[Susperia]

Or so you think.

 

[TylerTheNuke]

Wow, I wasted all this argument on a slipknot thread. I really don't feel like trying to prove that art isn't subjective again, especially since people tend to be so rigid that they can't change their minds, and you can waste hours on stuff like that. Just look at it this way. My dad is getting a masters of fine art degree. One day, he came home proclaiming that there is no such thing as good and bad and that the concepts of good and bad are merely social constructs. About a month later, he was back to dissing the bad shit and praising the good. I noticed, but I think he had completly forgotten that art is subjective crap. Look at it this way, are the words I am typing equal to poetry? No freaking way. People put a ton of time into shit like that. Quality is a product of work and skill. There is no way that a recorded belch is equal to Hvis Lyset Tar Oss, and to deny it makes you clueless, unless you can show that the recorded belch was the result of the invention of the recorder or something. Sure, some postmodern theorist may agree with you, but your definition of art is not what would be generally agreed upon. When people see good art, they want something that commands respect. They want to see the outcome of dedication and hard work, not some half-assed job.

Now, to progress to the genres debate. Don't diss genres. Or more specifically, don't say all X is bad. Not all metalcore sucks. I guess you could say nu-metal sucks. As long as you don't imply that every nu-metal band sucks. Nu-metal is a bad genre, I suppose. But, there is good nu-metal. There is good country (Johhny cash, neil young), good rap (a tribe called quest), good techno (kraftwerk), and good whatever you can think of.

 

[King Richard]

Now, to progress to the genres debate. Don't diss genres. Or more specifically, don't say all X is bad. Not all metalcore sucks. I guess you could say nu-metal sucks. As long as you don't imply that every nu-metal band sucks. Nu-metal is a bad genre, I suppose. But, there is good nu-metal. There is good country (Johhny cash, neil young), good rap (a tribe called quest), good techno (kraftwerk), and good whatever you can think of.

So much to say about that...just so few words.

 

[Ender Rises]

Wow, I wasted all this argument on a slipknot thread. I really don't feel like trying to prove that art isn't subjective again, especially since people tend to be so rigid that they can't change their minds, and you can waste hours on stuff like that. Just look at it this way. My dad is getting a masters of fine art degree. One day, he came home proclaiming that there is no such thing as good and bad and that the concepts of good and bad are merely social constructs. About a month later, he was back to dissing the bad shit and praising the good. I noticed, but I think he had completly forgotten that art is subjective crap. Look at it this way, are the words I am typing equal to poetry? No freaking way. People put a ton of time into shit like that. Quality is a product of work and skill. There is no way that a recorded belch is equal to Hvis Lyset Tar Oss, and to deny it makes you clueless, unless you can show that the recorded belch was the result of the invention of the recorder or something. Sure, some postmodern theorist may agree with you, but your definition of art is not what would be generally agreed upon. When people see good art, they want something that commands respect. They want to see the outcome of dedication and hard work, not some half-assed job.

Now, to progress to the genres debate. Don't diss genres. Or more specifically, don't say all X is bad. Not all metalcore sucks. I guess you could say nu-metal sucks. As long as you don't imply that every nu-metal band sucks. Nu-metal is a bad genre, I suppose. But, there is good nu-metal. There is good country (Johhny cash, neil young), good rap (a tribe called quest), good techno (kraftwerk), and good whatever you can think of.

That's pretty much exactly what we were arguing. Thanks!

 

[Thoth-Amon]

no it doesn't. i know more pretentious hipsters who think they "get" jazz when they really just like saying that they do cause it makes them feel cool, than people who actually do get it.

-First off I don't go around thinking I'm cool because I bought some Miles Davis cd's. And secondly HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW WHETHER I GET MILES OR NOT?! What kind of a pretentious ASSHOLE do you have to be to automatically assume that I don't understand and appreciate his music.


theory heads are homosexual. knowing theory just makes you more capable of talking out of your ass about things you really don't understand.

-Yeah I don't understand anything about music which I why I've composed numerous compositions for various classical ensembles. Retard.

not that i'm not quite well versed in theory. i've taken formal lessons in guitar, bass, and piano for about a decade now, and i've studied drums and percussion from all the drummers and percussionists i've known and played with over that time.

but i don't really think it matters much in the long run. so i don't even mention it when trying to prove my credentials as someone who knows music

-Well good for you then. But you cannot simply assume that I don't know anything about music or Miles in particular just because I don't like your shitty metalcore albums.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

Teh GrimCore,
Oh and all this talk about "if you hate metalcore you are close minded" is BS. How much close minded can this be:
so, you hate metalcore? hah! you're a fag! well, here's your chance to stop being a fag by downloading my favorite metalcore album of all time, "Jhazmyne's Lullably" by 7 Angels, 7 Plagues.

sounds terrible, right?

well, it pwns your soul and fuck right off to hell.

In other words if you don't like metalcore and this album you're a fag. Isn't it possible simply not to like the style or that album and not be a fag? No? Well now that's very close-minded of you to say that now isn't it?

 

[Teh Grimace]

In other words if you don't like metalcore and this album you're a fag.

exactly. fucking exactly.

this is 97% of my point.

people are entitled to like and dislike whatever they wish.

but they are to be held accountable for their lame taste.

...

if i smell faggotry, i shall proclaim it as such.

 

[CF87]

Majority of people can agree hardcore breakdowns thrown in songs are some of the most unitelligent guitar riffs ever in music history, that metalcore is a negative plague in heavier music forms right now and music in general. Metalcore is the second comiming of nu-metal.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

You're making a really fucking dumb goddamn generalization.

Trustkill-core = BAD YES. Not all metalcore = bad.

 

[Demilich]

Wow, I wasted all this argument on a slipknot thread. I really don't feel like trying to prove that art isn't subjective again, especially since people tend to be so rigid that they can't change their minds, and you can waste hours on stuff like that. Just look at it this way. My dad is getting a masters of fine art degree. One day, he came home proclaiming that there is no such thing as good and bad and that the concepts of good and bad are merely social constructs. About a month later, he was back to dissing the bad shit and praising the good. I noticed, but I think he had completly forgotten that art is subjective crap. Look at it this way, are the words I am typing equal to poetry? No freaking way. People put a ton of time into shit like that. Quality is a product of work and skill. There is no way that a recorded belch is equal to Hvis Lyset Tar Oss, and to deny it makes you clueless, unless you can show that the recorded belch was the result of the invention of the recorder or something. Sure, some postmodern theorist may agree with you, but your definition of art is not what would be genterally agreed upon. When people see good art, they want something that commands respect. They want to see the outcome of dedication and hard work, not some half-assed job. good techno (kraftwerk), and goodi whatever you can think of.

Dude, you're welcome to go about thinking that musical taste isn't subjective but you know what? That doesn't do anything to negate the millions upon millions of people who are out there listening to their own music for their own reasons. These people don't necessarily have any regard for the thinga you value in music.

Take me for example. The amount of effort put into music? What the fuck do I care as long as I like how it sounds. Am I gonna listen to some forum wanker that tells me I'm out of line with some kind of objective 'good taste' in music? A generally agreed upon standard of 'good music' or 'art' is just what your dad was on about: socially constructed consensis. Just because a lot of people, or a majority of people, like it doesn't make it the only good/right way it could be done. Just means those people like it more. Whatever, I'm not very good at keeping my rants focused and organized, so I'll just cut it off right there.

 

[Teh Grimace]

Majority of people

rly

hardcore breakdowns thrown in songs are some of the most unitelligent guitar riffs ever in music history

goddamit, i was typing an organized response about the nature of breakdowns as a valid aspect of songwriting, but then i decided that fuck off the greys you are not allowed to have any more opinions.

Metalcore is the second comiming of nu-metal.

all metalcore does not sound like the shit you hear on TV.

can you grasp that?

fuck man.

 

[skeptik]

I don't like Metalcore.

 

[metal paddy]

I don't like Metalcore.

AND ALL PADDY WILL SAY IS I AM IRON MAN BOW DOWN TO IRON MAN

 

[Thoth-Amon]

exactly. fucking exactly.

this is 97% of my point.

people are entitled to like and dislike whatever they wish.

but they are to be held accountable for their lame taste.

...

if i smell faggotry, i shall proclaim it as such.

And my point was that was VERY close-minded and here you are railing against us for being close-minded. In other words you are a hypocrite and your entire point has thus been invalidated.

 

[TylerTheNuke]

Dude, you're welcome to go about thinking that musical taste isn't subjective but you know what? That doesn't do anything to negate the millions upon millions of people who are out there listening to their own music for their own reasons. These people don't necessarily have any regard for the thinga you value in music.

Take me for example. The amount of effort put into music? What the fuck do I care as long as I like how it sounds. Am I gonna listen to some forum wanker that tells me I'm out of line with some kind of objective 'good taste' in music? A generally agreed upon standard of 'good music' or 'art' is just what your dad was on about: socially constructed consensis. Just because a lot of people, or a majority of people, like it doesn't make it the only good/right way it could be done. Just means those people like it more. Whatever, I'm not very good at keeping my rants focused and organized, so I'll just cut it off right there.

This is exactly the reply I was expecting to hear. What my dad was on about is that we take what is considered good by a majority and then defined as good. That shouldn't be, and I agree. For the last century, people have constantly been challenging what is accepted as good art. Ultimatly, it comes down to either creativity or hard work + skill. If you spend 10 years learning woodcraft and then build a absolutly cliche wood sculpture that takes a whole year, I'll respect it as art. If you are struck by a unique vision or idea, and wan't to share it with the world, I'll respect it as art, take 4'33" for example. However, if it has neither of those characteristics, then I can't respect it as art.

Now, let's take you for example. Say some absolute genius locks himself in a room for twenty years and then comes out with what he's been working on all that time, a five minute song. Then nobody likes it, you included. The artist commits suicide afterwards. So, if art is subjective, and everybody says that, for themselves, it sucks, then basically it sucks. Then, a peice generated by a computer program everybody likes. Is the peice generated by the computer program better then or equal to the peice by the human? Common sense says that the peice written by the human is better, but if art is subjective, then obviously, for you, the computer peice is better because you like it more. Common sense = objective

So, in a simpler idea, what is a peice worth when it grows on you? Is the peice getting better, or is your appreciation of the peice improving? Obviously the latter, because the peice isn't changing. Therefore, art is objective.